Faraday to Carlo Matteucci   3 March 1853

Royal Institution | 3 Mar 1853

My dear Matteucci

I was quite startled the other day by the receipt of your letter (I mean the MS. one to myself¹) for my imperfect memory made me quite unaware that there was any thing in Dr. B Jones translation of Müller’s² account of Du bois Reymonds experiments³, which, could make it any source of annoyance or irritation beyond the original. I knew from matters reported in the Comptes Rendus & otherwise, that you & Du Bois Raymond were in some degree antagonistically placed⁴; a thing very much to be regretted, but which often happens amongst the highest men in every department of Science, and more often when there are two or three only that really pursue the subject, than when there are many. Still I may truly say that when Du bois Reymond was here⁵ he never spoke of you in hard terms or objectionably to me; probably he avoided the subject, but he did not embitter it. Dr. Bence Jones translation was not completed I think in print until after he was gone; but of that I am not quite sure. Being entirely unacquainted with German I do not know what either Du bois Reymond or Dr. Muller may have said controversially, but I concluded you had borne with the work of the latter with that patience which most men of eminence have to practice. For who has not to put up in his day with insinuations & misrepresentations in the accounts of his proceedings given by others, bearing for the time the present injustice which is often unintentional and often originates in the haste of temper; & committing his fame & character to the judgment of the men of his own & future time⁶[.]

I see that that moves you which would move me most namely the imputation of a want of good faith; and I cordially sympathise with any one who is so charged unjustly. Such cases have seemed to me almost the only ones for which it is worth while entering into controversy. I have felt myself not unfrequently misunderstood, often misrepresented, sometimes passed by; as in the cases of Specific inductive capacity⁷, magneto electric currents⁸, definite electrolytic action⁹, &c &c but it is only in the cases where moral turpitude has been implied that I have felt called upon to enter on the subject in reply¹⁰. I can feel with you in the regret which you express (pp. 14, 15¹¹) at having to write such a letter and employ time in such a manner and looking again at the abstract can see how p23¹² & some other parts have made you think it necessary to do so, but the letter being written it will at all events have the good effect of collating dates both before and after the year 1842. Ultimately this collation of dates is every thing for in all matter of scientific controversy the dates form the data upon which that final umpire is appealed to (i.e the scientific world) will judge[.]

I am sorry the dedication annoys you[.] I suppose the Italian & the English feeling must differ in that respect. I do not like dedications but I look upon them as Honorary Memberships and not to be refused without something like an insult to the other parties concerned. In the chief number of cases in which I have been concerned, I have not been asked before hand & in all cases would rather not. We are bound by our duty to the Members and to Science to let Du bois Reymond (or any other person) make his experiments here¹³ and to the accident of his making them here is due the dedication itself as the book says.

These polemics of the Scientific world are very unfortunate things they form the great stain to which the beautiful edifice of scientific truth is subject: Are they inevitable? They surely cannot belong to science itself but to something in our fallen natures. How earnestly I wish in all such cases that the two champions were friends[.] Yet I suppose I may not hope that you & Du bois Reymond may some day become so. Well let me be your friend at all events & with the kindest remembrances to Madame Matteucci¹⁴ & yourself believe me to be, my dear Matteucci,

ever Very Truly Yours | M. Faraday